Down To Earth

IPCC
SHORTSIGHTEDNESS!

By Sunita
Narain

The United
Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) consists of scientists who can by no
stretch of the imagination be called radical or
activists. These are conventional scientists
working in conventional research
institutions—mostly from the rich world.
When they issue an urgent warning about the dire
and catastrophic impacts of climate change if the
global temperatures exceed 2°C above
pre-industrial levels, then we must take it very
seriously.

Also because, what IPCC
says in its just released report on 1.5°C is
probably an underestimate of the kind of dangers
that await a warmed world—many scientists
say the report has not taken into account the
spiral of events, called tipping point, which will
be unleashed as temperatures rise. The news is not
good. It’s time we understood this and
stopped questioning the science of climate
change.

IPCC has revised its
previous findings; it now says the impacts of
global warming will be greater than what was
previously anticipated at a temperature rise of
1.5°C. It should not surprise us. The
world—particularly the poor world—is
already seeing devastating impacts when the
temperature increase is 1.2°C. Climate change
is in our face. We don’t need science to
tell us anymore that it will happen. What IPCC
tells us is that the situation will get much
worse, and that we must not allow the temperature
to increase by 2°C.

The question then is
only one: What can and must the world do to keep
the temperature rise to below 1.5°C? IPCC
estimates that to stay below this temperature
guardrail, the world has to cut net anthropogenic
CO2 emissions by 45 per cent over the 2010 levels
by 2030, and reach net zero by 2050.

Let’s unpack this
statement. Roughly half of the CO2 emissions
generated through activities of humans need to be
cut by 2030. But as these are “net”
emissions, it means that the world can emit more
but the emissions must be “removed” to
achieve the targets. The “removal” of
emissions happens through “natural
sinks”—oceans, for instance, absorb
emissions and are part of the world’s
natural cleansing systems. Then forests are
important “sinks”—they sequester
carbon. But the report is also pointing towards
technology-induced removal through carbon capture
and storage (CCS), where emissions of CO2 are
harvested and then pushed back to store deep under
the earth’s surface.

Remember, this is when
the world remains intensely unequal in its
consumption of energy and so does its emissions.
The challenge is to reduce and yet, at the same
time, increase the use of energy by the poorest in
the world. According to IPCC, the remaining global
CO2 budget—how much can be emitted for the
world to stay below 1.5°C—is somewhere
between 420 gigatonnes of CO2 (GtCO2 ) to 580
GtCO2 . At the current rate of emissions, this
budget will be exhausted by 2030.

Remember also that the
bulk of the carbon budget has already been
appropriated by the already-rich countries. By
2030, when the budget is over and if the world
wants to stay below 1.5°C, then it must be in
negative emissions. That is, it must emit less
than what the world’s sinks can clean up.
What will then happen to the developing world? Now
that the cake is all eaten, even the crumbs have
been gobbled up, what happens to the development
needs of millions who do not have access to energy
and the millions who still need
growth.

Does this mean the world
stops talking about equity in climate change? This
is what the US has wanted for long. Its current
President Donald Trump has taken it to the
extreme—countries like India who want the
right to development are the problem, he says. The
US must be allowed to pollute more because it is
its birthright. All this said as crudely as only
he can.

There is no doubt that
equity is now passé in many ways. Countries
like India, as is reiterated in the IPCC 1.5°C
report, will be the worst impacted by climate
change. This is not the time to gripe about who
has created the problem and who must solve it.
That time is gone. Also, there is no point in
crying over spilt milk—the carbon budget is
gone. Countries have emitted and filled up the
available space. Now what is this talk of
“equity”? What does it
mean?

The fact is we have to
operationalise “equity” in this
changed scenario. This requires all countries,
including India, to act. But it also requires much
deeper cuts from the already developed world and
financial and technology support to the energy
poor to increase their emissions, if possible,
differently and with lower carbon emissions. This
is not the time to point fingers at the victims of
climate change—at countries like India for
needing space to develop. This calls for enormous
sagacity and leadership so that the world can
jointly and collaboratively find ways of reducing
emissions and providing growth. Dismissing the
need for climate justice will not get us
anywhere.

Let’s discuss what
can be done. IPCC looks at the rapid and
far-reaching transitions in energy, land, urban
and infrastructure— including transport and
building sectors. These are big contributors to
emissions.

So, what will it take to
build a more secure future? Firstly, it means that
renewable energy must supply 70-85 per cent of the
global electricity by 2050. Currently renewables
supply some 20 per cent of the electricity, with
the bulk coming from hydropower plants. So, the
challenge is enormous. How will this transition
happen? The share of natural gas can be roughly 8
per cent in this mix, but even this must include
CCS. Coal use must be close to zero per cent by
2050. This is a huge ambition—the world is
still addicted to coal for producing electricity,
in the rich as well as the poor parts. The
developing world needs to provide affordable
energy to large numbers of its people. How can it
replace coal and yet provide this energy security?
How? This is the question. But it is equally a
question, how the rich world will completely
de-carbonise its electricity? And all this in the
times of Trump.

The challenge is
ambition and equity in action. Drastic emission
reduction keeping in mind the need for climate
justice. Let’s keep our sights on this. Act.
Act now. The time for prevarication and
procrastination is over.